Posted on 04/14/2008 4:30:19 AM PDT by Renfield
Europeans have been hyperventilating over their self-perceived victories vis-à-vis the United States at the recent NATO Summit in Romania from April 2-4. France and Germany Thwart Bushs Plans, ran a triumphant headline in the Hamburg-based Der Spiegel. Europe Waits Out the Bush Administration, read another. Only One Lame Duck Here said the London-based Guardian in commentary that waxes giddy about Russias growing stranglehold over Europe. NATO Should Disappear said the Madrid-based El Pais.
But behind the spin, the 26-member NATO Summit (arguably the most important such gathering since the end of the Cold War) exposed a security-dependent Europe that is divided, weak, and fickle above all else.
Consider Spain, for example, where newly re-elected Socialist Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero was far less concerned about Spanish (or European) security than about getting some one-on-one face-time with US President George W Bush. Zapatero, a self-proclaimed feminist pacifist who is arguably the most anti-American leader in Europe today, is (unsurprisingly) one of the only such Europeans never to have been invited to the White House.
But in the Byzantine logic of Spanish politics, that elusive visit to the Oval Office (to see an American president who is broadly despised by most Spaniards) also happens to be the main litmus test by which Spaniards will judge whether Zapatero gets promoted from provincial politician to international statesman during his second term.
Thus Zapateros permanent non-relationship with the most powerful leader in the free world has become something of a media obsession in Spain, with the issue generating many miles of ink in national newspapers.
Imagine, then, the internecine recriminations when Zapateros much-vaunted mini-summit with Bush lasted all of about three seconds just enough for Bush to shout three words (which brings to a grand total of 18 words the two leaders have exchanged during the last four years) that appeared in newspaper headlines all across Spain: Hola, Hola, Felicidades. (Hello, Hello, Congratulations, referring to Zapateros re-election.)
Zapatero then took to the podium and tried to persuade bemused members of the Alliance to merge NATO with the United Nations! And, just for good measure, the prime minister also announced that Spain would not be sending more troops to Afghanistan, with or without the UN.
Not surprising, then, that Zapatero was captured in a politically devastating Summit photograph sitting in isolation, while the rest of the leaders present were huddled around Bush at the other end of the conference hall. The picture, which made the front page of every newspaper in Spain, opened up yet another pained debate about Spains declining influence in the world since Zapatero took office.
Then take Greece. It refused to allow Macedonia to join NATO because Greece wants its northern neighbor to change its name, which Greeks say jeopardizes their claim as the only the rightful descendants of Alexander the Great (356-323 BC) and Aristotle (384-322 BC).
The controversy erupted in 1991, when the former Yugoslav republic declared its independence from Belgrade and took the name Republic of Macedonia. Although more than 120 countries have now recognized the Republic of Macedonia under its current name, Greece says the name proves that Macedonia harbors implicit territorial claims on the northern Greek region also known as Macedonia. Never mind that by joining NATO, Macedonia would provide Greece with much-needed stability on its northern border.
Then consider Germany and France, arguably the greatest free-riding beneficiaries of American security since World War II. At the Bucharest Summit, they (together with Spain) refused to extend NATO Membership Action Plans to Georgia and Ukraine because they were afraid of provoking Russia, thanks to Europes growing dependence on Russian energy.
Germany, for example, already imports 35 percent of its oil and 40 percent of its natural gas from Russia, more than any country in Western Europe. The problem of energy dependency is being exacerbated by leftwing energy policies that are phasing out the countrys production of nuclear energy in favor of increased reliance on fossil fuels. Indeed, Germanys (and Europes) dependence on Russian energy imports may reach 70 percent by 2020, which (if current German behavior is any gauge) will give Russia a de facto veto over decisions on German (and European) security.
Europeans, in any case, know that keeping Georgia and Ukraine out of NATO will not appease Russia for very long. Indeed, the Germans appear to be looking for a face-saving way out of Europes long-term geo-strategic dilemma. On March 4, German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier gave a speech titled Towards a European Ostpolitik in which he suggests that Europes future lies in staking out a position mid-way between the United States and Russia. Say what?
Well, if Germany insists on turning Europe into a province of Russian, then debates over the future of NATO will be moot anyhow.
In France, meanwhile, the government on April 8 faced down a vote of no confidence, as leftists accused French President Nicolas Sarkozy of a dangerous Atlanticist drift that risked turning France into Bushs poodle. Socialist leader François Hollande said Sarkozy decided to send 700 French troops to Afghanistan under pressure from the Americans and that France risked losing its independence on the world stage.
With allies like these, expect trouble ahead for transatlantic relations, regardless of who occupies the White House next January.
Soeren Kern is Senior Fellow for Transatlantic Relations at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group
Demographically, over the course of the 21st Century, the issue of which of us likes, or dislikes, whom, is pretty minor.
You best be figuring out how to deal with all the unassimilated Muslims. Good luck with that. Seriously.
Nope. We are not talking about old people or boys in the Hitler-Jugend (HJ) but about those who were the gene pool for modern Germany (BTW - what was bad with the genetic material of boys in the Hitler-Jugend??!). My own grandfather i.e. is responsible for a whole graveyard of young Americans. Nevertheless he managed to survive the war and getting quite wealthy after it. After he entered the German Luftwaffe in early 1934 and was therefore one of the more experienced fighter pilots when the war began, the Luftwaffe used him originally as a pilot instructor. When the war was practically lost for Germany he saw some quite successful action against angloamerican bombers with his Focke-Wulf 190 D-9 in 1944 and 1945. He had an easy game with your poorly trained but quite well equipped kids in the skies.
Although it was only the defense of our own people and no aggressive nazi act against innocent people anymore (like most of the German warfare in WWII) he made quite many American and British mothers cry. In the meantime he is an nice old fellow of 91 years who feels sorry for that.
Going to war might be unavoidable for a man in certain situations but all in all it is quite idiotic. A unsatisfying experience for those who are not perverted.
Nevertheless my grandfather survived the war, killed his opponents in a breathtaking ratio and he was able to pass over his genetic material to me. Since I am also quite successful in the things I am doing this is Darwinism at its best.
:)
Regards from Germany!
A.B.
Nope. It was no problem to control Germany since there was no reasonable alternative to the US and its occupation to my compatriots. You guys were the nicest occupiers anyone can think of and the integration into the west enabled us to rebuild our country. We died long enough for German nationalism and other BS. Therefore it was for sure the best and most intelligent solution to let America pay for our German wealth and security after the lost war. The loss of sovereignty was tolerable for western Germany since we were able to act economically free. Both sides had their profit. America had its safe strategic base on the front of the Soviet empire. Our German price was the risk of complete destruction in a limited nuclear war. Since reunited Germany survived communism and Russian nukes were never dropped on our soil it turned out as a good deal.
Nevertheless we are speaking about today. The occupation is over and all bills are paid. Contemporary Germany is a nation with 80.000.000 inhabitants. Even our army (rather still prepared to intercept Soviet troops in the Fulda gap than to act as a international police troop) has 250.000 men under weapons. The US are planning to leave 24.500 men (most of them in logistic sectors like air-transport etc.) in Ramstein and a few other locations in 2014 from originally 350.000 during the cold war. You should understand that this is not very impressive anymore and for sure no "occupation army".
There is rather understandable fear in your DoD that future German governments could kick out the remaining American installations and/or close the German airspace to replenishment for US troops that are engaged in the ME, Africa or Asia. This is the reason why they try to relocate American installations in eastern Europe to distribute the risk. Nevertheless this turned out as problematic for the US since Poland and the Czech Republic are not interested into any foreign deployments beyond their direct control. I.e. there are fierce discussions about the status of a few hundred GIs that shall control the new planned missile defense.
I am not convinced. :)
P.S.
I have nothing against America cleaning up ruthless dictators and conquer some oil wells if they do it with success. We prefer buying our oil from people like you than from barbarians like Saddam Hussein. Nevertheless it should be understood that there are some nations who want to keep out of such conflicts. After all it has to be added that the success of this operation is regrettably not granted yet. If there is a political change in your nation that includes surrender in the ME the situation will be much worse than ever before. Iraq could turn into a Iranian province or a second Somalia. Such is not in our German interest either. Billions and bazillions of Dollars and last but not least the lives of 4000 American servicemen would have been wasted then.
Therefore it will stay interesting.
“After all, today’s Europeans are descended from peasants who didn’t have the backbone to pack up and head to America when they had the chance.
Their grandchildren and great-grandchildren inherited their temerity.”
You clearly have a racist agenda against the Europeans, insulting the various classes that make up European society, our fathers, grandfathers and great grandfathers. More than you know, you owe thanks to my family and all others throughout Europe.
A more uncouth, xenophobic wretch I couldn’t have the sad misfortune to meet. You are all that is wrong.
The best way for me to respond to that is if you read ‘Global Disorder’ by Robert Harvey. Balanced and illuminating.
Since when did UNSC resolutions make a difference to US policy?
What kind of response do you think the Chinese will have as Taiwan falls more and more under US influence?
Various nations are backed, or have been, by the US to use as regional stalwarts against more pressing enemies. Think of Husseins Iraq in the 80’s as they formed the bastion against shia Iran. They weren’t exactly, the purest of allies right?
I was talking of the civilians really mate, as it goes without saying that soldiers and armed forces will spend much time abroad. I’m on about the 95% of Yanks who don’t have a passport and who have never set foot outside their country.
And in doing so removed a petty dictator who was the wall that stopped and diverted Shia Iran. Now, with Iran as the only regional power, we aren’t in better shape. Thats a geo-political fact my FRiend.
I’ve enjoyed reading your posts AB. You have no doubt helped everyone here in understanding Germany a bit more, and the commonality that all European and American peoples share.
I hope to find yourself on other threads, so that we can continue learning from each other. Germany deserves to be at the heart of Europe, making the decisions with former enemies, now firms friends.
I'm sorry to hear that opinion, given that we haven't met. I generally don't make that kind of impression.
The relative effects of long-term demographic shifts, such as my example, are critical to understanding how nations think and react. These impacts are already having a significant impact as Europe continues to allow Islamist radicals to flood their cities without restraint.
Demographic shifts have their effects here in the States, as well. Many of the people who live in San Francisco, for example, are descended from adventurers who would have continued pioneering west if there were more land past California - they are adventurous, daring, and willing to push the limits.
I'm not certain why I owe thanks to your family and all others throughout Europe, unless your family owns the vineyard in Italy which produces my favorite wine.
After all, todays Europeans are descended from peasants who didnt have the backbone to pack up and head to America when they had the chance.
Their grandchildren and great-grandchildren inherited their temerity.
How on earth did you expect me to respond to this tirade of spit? This is the kind of spit you opine to Billy Bob, Red and Scooter at the Dusty Texan. By insulting every single man, woman and child inside Europe’s boundaries you purposely made the statement to get the kind of response you are reading now.
The racist, and classist, statement that you made is arrogant and unworthy of an educated man. So you aren’t, and seem content to armchair the world and bless us with your balanced, non-rhetoric, spew.
“Europe continues to allow Islamist radicals to flood their cities without restraint.”
Do you Yanks, in all honesty, have another argument to make, or do you just parrot the spite that Fox News tells you too. You have never had an original thought in your head, so should I be wasting my time with someone as xenophobic as yourself????
Peasants are we my Liege? Forgive my unwordly ways Sir, but I descend from a long line of peasants, living as we do in our peasant continent, living little peasant lives.
You utter.................
At least I do not descend from peasants soley. My ancestors have been knights, mayors, engineers and all sorts of tradesmen. Quite a few of them have been peasants of course but this is absolutely not slanderous to me. Since large parts of my family history can be tracked until the 13th century (which is quite funny) I have reason to be proud on my family. Most of them were and are very interesting persons. From German nazi-era officers (Wehrmacht-Army) to Jews (no kidding) you will find everything among them. Besides - we even have relatives in the US (also in France and the UK) too. A uncle of mine is professor for dentistry in New York...
Settling in America was interesting for some people in Europe but not for all. Those who were already free (due to their social position i.e.) and wealthy in Europe had simply no reason to leave their homeland for the new world. BTW - they represent for sure no bad genetic material. Some of my compatriots went to America and came back to Europe. My own father i.e. lived for 3 years in Canada and the US before he returned to Germany.
The widespread American pride to represent the most capable breed on this planet (just because their ancestors made a cruise between Hamburg and New York) causes usually compassionate smiling on our side of the big pond. Dumb European people who think in the same categories argue that Americans are the offspring of despicable underdogs without manners and class while Australians are the breed of confirmed criminals.
To me this is all complete bullshi*. People might be influenced by their societies but I think it is impossible to conclude on the character of whole ethnic groups. We deal with individuals and not with "the (eternal) German", "the (eternal) Brit", "the (eternal) Jew", "the (eternal) American" or whatever.
Anyway - it is good to welcome other Europeans here. :)
“To me this is all complete bullshi*. People might be influenced by their societies but I think it is impossible to conclude on the character of whole ethnic groups. We deal with individuals and not with “the (eternal) German”, “the (eternal) Brit”, “the (eternal) Jew”, “the (eternal) American” or whatever.”
Truer words have not been said on FR before now.
|
Is every single European descended come from peasants? Of course not. Tradesmen, royalty, shop owners, people of all varieties stayed at home rather than emmigrate. However, those people who did come to America, by their very nature, were ambitious, daring, risk takers. When you remove a sizable portion of that type of population from your original population, it does have a lasting affect.
As to your other points, my view of the Islamist invasion does not come from Fox News, which I find rather elementary and redundant. Rather, it comes from that Redneck Xenophobe Mark Steyn, as well as personal observation in Paris, Florence, and Milan. (No armchair opinions here).
Again, nothing personal was intended toward you and I apologize for my poor communication in that regard - however, I stand by my opinion.
“After all, todays Europeans are descended from peasants who didnt have the backbone to pack up and head to America when they had the chance.
Their grandchildren and great-grandchildren inherited their temerity”
How exactly should I have interpreted this point?
FYI-Some of my family were ‘peasants’ but this isn’t to say they weren’t good, honest people, who had/have great value to the community and the nation as a whole. Your generalisation is worryingly rascist, even more so if you cant see it for yourself.
“When the war was practically lost for Germany he saw some quite successful action against angloamerican bombers with his Focke-Wulf 190 D-9 in 1944 and 1945. He had an easy game with your poorly trained but quite well equipped kids in the skies.”
I think your grandfather has been telling you some tall tales. The allies practically had air superiority over Western Europe by mid-’44. Operation Overlord would have failed if the Nazis had a viable air force at this time. The numerical advantage alone spelled certain doom for Nazi fighters by ‘45.
“Going to war might be unavoidable for a man in certain situations but all in all it is quite idiotic. A unsatisfying experience for those who are not perverted.”
Going to war to remove murderous dictatorships will bring peace and stability and avoid future conflicts.
“Regards from Germany!”
Regards from America! And thanks for sending us good tasting dark beer that is reasonably priced (St. Pauli’s Girl).
;-)
“There is rather understandable fear in your DoD that future German governments could kick out the remaining American installations and/or close the German airspace to replenishment for US troops that are engaged in the ME, Africa or Asia.”
I’ve never heard this before. Who in the DoD expressed this fear? The last time we downsized our troop levels in Germany, the German labor unions were lobbying our congress to reconsider. And Germany’s unwillingness to increase their defense budget indicates have have no interest in going down this path.
“The best way for me to respond to that is if you read Global Disorder by Robert Harvey. Balanced and illuminating.”
I’ll pass, thanks. Why would I read that when I can read moveon.org and the huffington post for free?
“Since when did UNSC resolutions make a difference to US policy?”
The armistice agreement that ended the first gulf war was based upon Iraq’s acceptance and compliance of the UNSC resolutions. This is why these are cited within the congressional legislation authorizing Operation Iraqi Freedom.
“What kind of response do you think the Chinese will have as Taiwan falls more and more under US influence?”
I still don’t understand what you mean by your previous statements. You had claimed that the United States are trying to find other nations to do our ‘bidding’ in the ‘allies region’? What do you mean by this? What bidding? Do you mean enforcing the UNSC resolutions?
“What kind of response do you think the Chinese will have as Taiwan falls more and more under US influence?”
I still don’t know what you mean when you accused the United States of using Taiwan to ‘bait the Chinese’. What does this mean? Baiting China to do what?
“Various nations are backed, or have been, by the US to use as regional stalwarts against more pressing enemies. Think of Husseins Iraq in the 80s as they formed the bastion against shia Iran. They werent exactly, the purest of allies right?”
No, we denounced the crimes committed by both sides along with the rest of the council.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.